4. Classification of synonyms

The only existing classification system for synonyms was estab­lished by Academician V. V. Vinogradov. In his classification system there are three principles of classification of synonyms:

1. according to the difference in connotational and denotational meanings

we distinguish:

• Ideographic (which he defined as words conveying the same notion but differing in shades of meaning),

Among ideographic synonyms are those that:

• very close in meaning e.g. terrible horrible

• differ in meaning considerably interpreter, translator

• differ in manner f action look, stare

• differ in the degree of quality, in intensity of an action want, desire, be eager to, like, adore, be fond of

• denote the same thing but differ in their emotional colouring boy, fellow

• differ in volume of concept they express happy lucky

• pairs of synonyms when one expresses continuity of the action or state, another expresses elementary action to speak – to say

• stylistic (differing in stylistic characteristics) – differ in connotational component in emotional, expressive and evaluative overtones : doctor – doc., captain – cap., to help – to assist

2. according to the criterion of interchangeability

• total – can replace each other in any context without distortion; they can be mostly found in terms flexion, inflection, ending

• partial – have some differences but are interchangeable ask, beg

3. according to the criterion of context

• proper - are similar in meaning irrespective of the contextual conditions to buy to purchase

• contextual – are similar in meaning only under some specific conditions: buy get

Some linguists single out absolute synonyms (coinciding in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics) fatherland - motherland

Lecture 6 english phraseology

1. Phraseological units in English.

2. Ways of forming phraseological units.

Different classifications of phraseological units.

1. Phraseological units in English.

The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units. Phr. units (idioms) can be described as the most picturesque, colourful and expressive part of language vocabulary. If synonyms can be figuratively referred to as tints and colours of vocabulary, phraseology is a kind of picture gallery, in which are collected vivid and amusing sketches of the nation’s customs, traditions & prejudice, recollections of its past history scraps of fairy-tales.

Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. Phraseological units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units „idioms”. Phr. units are viewed as functionally and semantically inseparable units and they are usually described as word equivalents.

There are have been made several attempts to approach the problem of Phraseologisms in different6 ways. Until now there is a certain argument in opinions as to the essential features of phraseological units. The term “set phrase” idiom, word equivalent are treated now differently by different scholars. Most Ukrainian and Russian scholars use the term phraseological unit (ph.u.), which was first introduces by acad. Vinogradov. The term idiom is widely used by western scholars. The boarder line between a free word group and ph.u. is not clearly defined. The so-called free word group are relatively free because their collocations with with number of words is limited by their lexical and grammatical valency which makes some of them very close to set phrases. Free word groups are so called not because of any absolute freedom but simply because they are each time built up anew in the speech process whereas idioms are used as ready-made units with fixed and constant structures.

The term idiom implies that the essential feature of linguistic unit is its idiomasity or lack of motivation. The term word equivalent stresses not only semantic but functional inseparability of a certain word-group, its ability to function in speech as a single word.

a nice kettle of fish = nonsense

to cross words with smb.= to argue

once in a blue moon= very seldom

to cry for the moon =demand impossible

to be on the carpet

to turn a blind eye

to turn a deaf ear

to break one’s word

So in general Ph. u. is defined as a non-motivated w. gr. that can’t be freely made up in speech but is reproduced in speech as a ready-made unit. This definition is based on the assumption that the essential features of the Ph. u. are:

• idiomacity – the quality of ph.g. when the meaning of the whole is not deductible from the meaning of its constitutive parts

• stability – implies that it exists as a ready-made linguistic unit that doesn’t allow any variability of its lexical components and gram. structures

• roproductibility – the regular usage of p. u. in speech as a single unchangeable collocation